I certainly watch out for some of them doing dangerous u-turns in school zones or illegal double parking, never mind the sticker or the sign you see attached to the rear window.

Back to the topic at hand, I did send the advocacy group my thoughts on the matter. I doubt they'll respond and if they do I suspect it'll be nothing more than vitriol of the style we used to have here when the two advocacy groups were fighting each other.

fat and old wrote:, I spoke to old mate ambo and old mate fire rescue man today and they confirmed it.

Old mates aren't reliable sources of information. I'd take official communication from those higher up the chain at higher value. Though like I said, whoever discerning the original motivations of the first person who put such designations on cars is impossible.

Actually Human, Old Mate is a very reliable source of information as far as what he thinks, and as posted, that's what they think. If they use the stickers as an indication that there may be a baby around and check for it, then it's a self fulfilling truth for them. Reality is they don't give a flying %(&# what you or I think.

Not that I care. I'd be happy enough to see most humans bred out of existence. More oxygen for the animals. Humans are a blight on this planet and make me sick with their me me me attitudes.

I have a different opinion - it may be unpopular here based on the general consensus. I even agree with some of the criticism... but...

It should be fair to say that most riders and most drivers will look after one another and act courteously. But there bad apples in all groups and there are also traffic situations which, due to bad design or mindlessness, create dangerous situations from collisions to placing a bike rider in a high traffic area because decent alternatives are not available (from a marked lane, to separate path to public transport than would reduce the number of vehicles).

Cyclists however are grouped together... the action or circumstances of a single rider affect many others and without any responsibility or influence, I may be blamed or targeted.

The idea of trying to create a signal and awareness in the group is not bad. I don't feel that it is a white flag to surrender even if the connection is natural nor that it implies fault. It is like making a stance and if it is adopted by enough people and recognised by enough, there is a real opportunity of it having 'some' effect. Riders who misbehave make a more conscious effort to behave and drivers who may be critical have slightly more patience if they recognise riders are trying to be better.

The intention is good but the implementation of 'wearing or carrying something white' is ineffective. If my helmet is already white, there is no change or difference. If I wear white socks to show solidarity, everyone else may simply perceive me as a person wearing white socks. The statement is not unique enough.

A significant flaw is that the 'white helmet' says "what can cyclists do you improve their image" but the underlying issue is that governments are failing in their responsibility and until they make a serious effort to improve infrastructure and education - bike riders have very limited ability to change public opinion by telling everyone "we are good and responsible".

A far better implementation would be, as an example, a black armband. "Cyclist Safety is Dead". This means that the strategy is a bit different - it is more of a political message. But it is unique, has shock factor which creates attention. It is more practical to implement and if you imagine a bunch of 20 cyclists with black armbands, even if a few are wearing dark or black gear, you will still notice a bunch of cyclists with black bands.

So I admit, this campaign appears to have been done poorly but what I will commend is that it is an attempt at action - continual action and protest is important for cycling groups and cyclists who genuinely want change.

AUbicycles wrote:I have a different opinion - it may be unpopular here based on the general consensus. I even agree with some of the criticism... but...

Yep.

AUbicycles wrote:The idea of trying to create a signal and awareness in the group is not bad. I don't feel that it is a white flag to surrender even if the connection is natural nor that it implies fault. It is like making a stance and if it is adopted by enough people and recognised by enough, there is a real opportunity of it having 'some' effect.

But what is exactly being signaled? To whom? And how are they to interpret it? What does this signal tell the audience when the audience sees this signal on many cyclists who in their eyes are behaving badly? (Eg taking a lane, riding two abreast, riding on a busy road...)

AUbicycles wrote:if they recognise riders are trying to be better.

How does this occur when in most of the hater's eyes better is when cyclists are off the road?

AUbicycles wrote:A far better implementation would be, as an example, a black armband. "Cyclist Safety is Dead". This means that the strategy is a bit different - it is more of a political message. But it is unique, has shock factor which creates attention. It is more practical to implement and if you imagine a bunch of 20 cyclists with black armbands, even if a few are wearing dark or black gear, you will still notice a bunch of cyclists with black bands.

A significant minority see cyclist as victims of their own choices. Gaining sympathy in the current environment with black armbands is akin to sky divers protesting against gravity.

IMO the focus needs to target the authorities because at the moment they are the ones with the power to legitimise cycling and in most places they are not doing so. (In some places the local councils have succeeded and the difference is amazing.)

From what I can see cycling advocacy groups that target education the general public have had negligible or often negative impact.

human909 wrote:IMO the focus needs to target the authorities because at the moment they are the ones with the power to legitimise cycling and in most places they are not doing so. (In some places the local councils have succeeded and the difference is amazing.)

yes, authorities are happy to take an anti-populist, authoritarian stance with things such as migration, crime, and global warming. It's telling they cannot do the same with motorist attitudes towards cyclists.

The problem is politicians are excessively ignorant and don't believe they have an obligation to lead by example. If more politicians rode, they'd pretty quickly 'get it'.

I maintain Aussie politicians, bureaucrats, and motoring advocacy groups need to explain why European road regulations and law enforcement are inferior to Australia's.

human909 wrote:IMO the focus needs to target the authorities because at the moment they are the ones with the power to legitimise cycling and in most places they are not doing so. (In some places the local councils have succeeded and the difference is amazing.)

yes, authorities are happy to take an anti-populist, authoritarian stance with things such as migration, crime, and global warming. It's telling they cannot do the same with motorist attitudes towards cyclists.

The problem is politicians are excessively ignorant and don't believe they have an obligation to lead by example. If more politicians rode, they'd pretty quickly 'get it'.

I maintain Aussie politicians, bureaucrats, and motoring advocacy groups need to explain why European road regulations and law enforcement are inferior to Australia's.

The ones that do ride obviously are too pampered by having white BMW X5 SUVs following them, or they only ride in special events or just on cycleways.

I did get a response back from BQ, but it basically played down the impact that the "white helmet" idea would have, and additionally played down the influence they have:

"over-stating our reach into the minds of car drivers, either in Queensland or beyond. And in no other campaign does a person not displaying a symbol ..(various examples of symbol types).. indicate anything at all"

My initial thoughts were along the "Uncle Tom" route and I left them a pretty blunt message to that effect.

However, I have noticed since that the balance of media coverage has changed. Stating that cyclists are "terrified" of aggressive motorists and of being hit, and this message coming from a woman, seems to have flipped a switch in some journalistic heads. Most of the most recent articles have been in relation to scary close passes, and of the victims of collisions. The number of hostile stories has been much less.

Playing the victim card in relation to the AIDS epidemic was one key strategy (among several) the gay lobby successfully used to gain sympathy and humanise themselves from being a despised "out group" to becoming, if not mainstream, accepted as human beings just like everyone else (as indeed they should be). Long story short, it was a contributor to the success of the SSM campaign.

Perhaps this white flag strategy is not quite as dumb as it first looked.

AUbicycles wrote:The idea of trying to create a signal and awareness in the group is not bad. I don't feel that it is a white flag to surrender even if the connection is natural nor that it implies fault. It is like making a stance and if it is adopted by enough people and recognised by enough, there is a real opportunity of it having 'some' effect.

But what is exactly being signaled? To whom? And how are they to interpret it? What does this signal tell the audience when the audience sees this signal on many cyclists who in their eyes are behaving badly? (Eg taking a lane, riding two abreast, riding on a busy road...)

That is the right question - the intentions are good but the format and implementation of the campaign are unclear. They can send mix messages and can be easily interpreted in many other ways.

An important point is raised - if a driver generally doesn't like bike riders and view them as a nuisance, inconvenience and is on the tipping point to behave rashly - bike riders can try and send as many messages as they want but is still wont change this motorists view that a bike rider doesn't belong on the road.

That is why education campaigns (and even laws like the 1 meter) need infrastructure and the right physical traffic improvements to improve.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.